Navigate:

House Democrats jockey for positions of power

Rep. Allyson Schwartz lands on the wrong side of the committee numbers game. |
John Shinkle
Close

One dramatic case in point is Schwartz, who found herself caught on the wrong side of the numbers game Wednesday, ranking 17th among a Democratic Ways and Means contingent that will have only 15 members next year.

A favorite of leadership, Schwartz has engaged on health policy, took an extra assignment on the Budget Committee and poured nearly $2 million into her colleagues’ coffers during the past campaign cycle. If there’s a sentimental favorite for a get-out-of-jail-free card, it’s Schwartz.

Text Size

-

+

reset

But each lawmaker losing a seat has a case to make, and few will get reprieves in a system based largely on seniority. That’s got junior members agitating for senior lawmakers to give up secondary and tertiary assignments, at the very least.

Schwartz even had a leadership-blessed agreement with the No. 16 Democrat on the Ways and Means panel, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. After she backed him for the top Democratic spot on the Budget Committee, he was prepared to temporarily give up his Ways and Means seat.

But he got knocked off, too — making the deal moot unless another seat somehow materializes.

Republicans say that’s not likely to happen.

“We expect these numbers are final,” said one GOP leadership aide.

Schwartz isn’t going down easily. She’s running a behind-the-scenes campaign to win support to keep her seat, but even junior members say seniority should be a significant — if not a determinant — factor in deciding who stays and who goes.

There’s pressure on Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), who has a spot at the leadership table as caucus chairman, to take a leave of absence from the committee so that Schwartz can stay. But in the past, caucus chairmen have not been asked to give up their assignments, and another party leader, caucus Vice Chairman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), isn’t facing the same kind of pressure.

For low-rung party leaders, choice committee assignments can be a reward for the extra time and energy they put into working on policy and politics for their colleagues.

Larson said he would abide by the caucus’s decision but plans to stay put. “I owe it to my district to be on the committee,” he said.

Still, some Democrats say Larson should step aside for Schwartz.

“You need to field the strongest team possible in the minority, and there’s growing consensus that Schwartz brings more to the table than Larson on policy and in the policy arena,” said one Democratic insider who backs the Pennsylvanian.

Schwartz said she’s doing everything she can to be positioned well in case a lifeline is thrown her way and that she’ll adjust if she has to.

“This is about numbers. I don’t take it personally,” she said.

As junior members await their fates, Democrats have been busy picking among veteran contenders for the top party posts on committees such as Armed Services and Oversight and Government Reform.

The latter fight, now between Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), once featured the current chairman, Edolphus Towns of New York, as the prohibitive favorite over Ohio’s Dennis Kucinich.

Readers' Comments (14)

1. Considering how Larson very conveniently scheduled the vote for his position as caucus chairman first so that he'd have no competition, I'd say that the chances of him actually voluntarily giving up ANYTHING are somewhere in the vicinity of "zero".

“The institution works better if people can focus on a narrower portfolio,” Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.) said of his own proposal, due for a caucus vote Thursday, that would prohibit the top Democrat on a legislative committee from also leading one of its subcommittees.

“Republicans occasionally have good ideas,” he said when informed that his comments were consistent with Boehner’s philosophy.

That is an excellent idea by Watt. The more pots the Congress critters have their fingers in, the more corrupt they become. Based on the 785 seats available, that means that at least 331 (excluding Speaker) Congress critters will be on two separate committees.

Smaller government means smaller and more effective roles played by the Congress critters. This is a small step forward to streamlining the federal government. Less people per committee equals less spending budget of staff members, supplies and incidentals. Less committees (Boehner shut down the climate change committee.) is another small step forward.

Some of these things are nice ideas, and I can see why someone would be frustrated with, or angry toward things like Government employees. But as supply-side as you might be, at some point you have to realize Libertarian philosophy is going to fail.

If you want non-military to go, does that include FBI, CIA, ATF, Immigration Agents...the Federal Government is certainly bloated, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is a ridiculous idea.

Look at the photo with Pelosi on the left and Conyers on the right. It's clear they need to get away from the cameras and back on their IV's quickly. And, the "young" Democrats - in the private sector, we'd all be waiting for their imminent retirement.

But, what is truly GHASTLY about all of them, old or less old, is this sense of ENTITLEMENT. Where does that arrogance, ignorance and hubris come from? Do they speed in their limos from DC to the "home district" with nary a glance out the window on the way? How could they not have a clue that these are the very attitudes and behaviors that make the Voters so contemptuous of them?

They are IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE. That's it. They are not in Congress to pad their resumes, their paychecks and hit the A List cocktail parties.

Considering their feverish and feeble political gamesmanship, they are lower than the bottom-dwellers we always intuitively knew were.

Look at the photo with Pelosi on the left and Conyers on the right. It's clear they need to get away from the cameras and back on their IV's quickly. And, the "young" Democrats - in the private sector, we'd all be waiting for their imminent retirement.

But, what is truly GHASTLY about all of them, old or less old, is this sense of ENTITLEMENT. Where does that arrogance, ignorance and hubris come from? Do they speed in their limos from DC to the "home district" with nary a glance out the window on the way? How could they not have a clue that these are the very attitudes and behaviors that make the Voters so contemptuous of them?

They are IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE. That's it. They are not in Congress to pad their resumes, their paychecks and hit the A List cocktail parties.

Considering their feverish and feeble political gamesmanship, they are lower than the bottom-dwellers we always intuitively knew were.

Look at the photo with Pelosi on the left and Conyers on the right. It's clear they need to get away from the cameras and back on their IV's quickly. And, the "young" Democrats - in the private sector, we'd all be waiting for their imminent retirement.

But, what is truly GHASTLY about all of them, old or less old, is this sense of ENTITLEMENT. Where does that arrogance, ignorance and hubris come from? Do they speed in their limos from DC to the "home district" with nary a glance out the window on the way? How could they not have a clue that these are the very attitudes and behaviors that make the Voters so contemptuous of them?

They are IN THE SERVICE OF THE PEOPLE. That's it. They are not in Congress to pad their resumes, their paychecks and hit the A List cocktail parties.

Considering their feverish and feeble political gamesmanship, they are lower than the bottom-dwellers we always intuitively knew were.

The Dem's have to learn that the way they treated everyone else, even going back to Dashel & co., is what they have to expect in these lean times. Dummies never learn, they just keep making the same mistakes...soon they will all be gone, save 6 for pall bearers.

If the new House Leader would just double down after the train gets rolling and cut more budgets and cut a few funds for a lot of dept's that are not carrying their own weight... EPA, BLM, etc, etc.

And defund all the pork in any big bills passed in last 30 days... He can do it and WE are the ones who are waiting... and watching very closely.

Stop the Republicans from going to Congress, if the PEOPLE don't want manipulative gas price hikes! Since the Republicans have taken over Congress, gas prices have hiked up to 30-40 cents per gal. Gas is Americans' most important and needed utility. It serves the mobility culture of the People in 50 states! Without the ability to afford the prices of gas, this nation would be stifled... and this nation can't afford to the Republicans to stifle the mobility of this nation's people!

OH, DESPICABLE ME! I WAS SO WRONG - IN MY PREVIOUS POST, I "MISIDENTIFIED" THE GUY ON THE RIGHT IN THE PHOTO WITH PELOSI AS "CONYERS", WHEN I KNEW IT WAS DINGELL. DOESN'T MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE AS THEY'RE ALL ON "LIFE SUPPORT".

BUT, "JanJan 08" - ARE YOU WRITING FROM AN E CAFE IN TURKMENISTAN? I ASSUME SO BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW THE REPUBLICANS DO NOT TAKE THE MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE UNTIL JANUARY 2011 - THE 4TH - I THINK.

SO, PLEASE, GO BEAT UP THOSE OLD FRAUDS, HARRY AND NANCY AND KEN SALAZAR FOR THE NASTY GAS PRICES.